Simmons v. State, 89-3342
| Decision Date | 23 May 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-3342,89-3342 |
| Citation | 579 So.2d 874 |
| Parties | Charles SIMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 579 So.2d 874, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1476 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Charles Simmons, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., James Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
This appeal is from the denial of a motion for postconviction relief. We affirm.
Simmons pled guilty in 1964 to escape. He was sentenced to eighteen months hard labor; and that sentence has been served. He was a prisoner in Leavenworth federal prison in Kansas when this appeal was filed; but his return address is now in Stillwater, Minnesota--presumably another prison. The escape conviction is somehow affecting Simmons' present incarceration. Simmons now claims that in 1964 he received ineffective assistance of counsel and his plea was coerced.
Simmons petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court. The district court dismissed the claim without prejudice on the ground Simmons had not exhausted state remedies. The district court adopted the magistrate's suggestion "that at least two procedural remedies are still available: 1) a motion to withdraw guilty plea and 2) motion to correct sentence pursuant to Rule 3.800...."
Simmons filed the motions suggested by the federal court in the Florida circuit court, and he incorporated a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The circuit court denied the motions and petition. The court said (1) the only procedures to withdraw a guilty plea are provided by Rules 3.170(f) and 3.850. Rule 3.170(f) must be invoked prior to sentencing, and the time to file a 3.850 motion has lapsed. (2) A Rule 3.800 motion may only be used to correct an illegal sentence given without statutory authority. Simmons did not assert the trial court sentenced him without statutory authority. (3) The circuit court is without power to issue a writ of habeas corpus for a prisoner who is not in the custody of the state of Florida.
The circuit court's analysis is sound, and we affirm. Having carefully examined the record in this case, we also note that in our view Simmons has exhausted his state remedies.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harper v. State, 92-2344
...281 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 604 So.2d 487 (Fla.1992); Kelly v. State, 599 So.2d 727 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); and Simmons v. State, 579 So.2d 874 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). The state's reliance on the above cases is misplaced, in that none of them imply a Karchesky error raised in a 3.800(a) mo......
-
Skidmore v. State, 96-2343
...602 (Fla.1996); Barnes v. State, 643 So.2d 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Gainer v. State, 590 So.2d 1001 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Simmons v. State, 579 So.2d 874 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). As stated above, this 3.850 is untimely. But even if the defendant had brought a timely motion and was successful in wi......
-
Pace v. State, 95-679
...failed to allege facts demonstrating that this final issue is a matter cognizable pursuant to a Rule 3.800(a) motion. Simmons v. State, 579 So.2d 874 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (Rule 3.800 motion may be used only to correct an illegal sentence given without statutory AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in ......
-
Slattery v. State, 94-1500
...and Keith S. Kromash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee. Before JORGENSON, COPE and GODERICH, JJ. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Simmons v. State, 579 So.2d 874 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (only procedures by which to withdraw guilty plea are Fla.R.Crim. P. 3.170(f), which "must be invoked prior to sentencing,......